Beam angle optimization for intensity-modulated radiation therapy using a guided pattern search method

Automated multi-criterial planning with beam angle optimization to establish non-coplanar VMAT class solutions for nasopharyngeal carcinoma

PURPOSE

Complexity in selecting optimal non-coplanar beam setups and prolonged delivery times may hamper the use of non-coplanar treatments for nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). Automated multi-criterial planning with integrated beam angle optimization was used to define non-coplanar VMAT class solutions (CSs), each consisting of a coplanar arc and additional 1 or 2 fixed, non-coplanar partial arcs.

METHODS

Automated planning was used to generate a coplanar VMAT plan with 5 complementary computer-optimized non-coplanar IMRT beams (VMAT+5) for each of the 20 included patients. Subsequently, the frequency distribution of the 100 patient-specific non-coplanar IMRT beam directions was used to select non-coplanar arcs for supplementing coplanar VMAT. A second investigated CS with only one non-coplanar arc consisted of coplanar VMAT plus a partial arc at 90° couch angle (VMATCS90). Plans generated with the two VMATCSs were compared to coplanar VMAT.

RESULTS

VMAT+5 analysis resulted in VMATCS60: two partial non-coplanar arcs at couch angles 60° and -60° to complement coplanar VMAT. Compared to coplanar VMAT, the non-coplanar VMATCS60 and VMATCS90 yielded substantial average dose reductions in OARs associated with xerostomia and dysphagia, i.e., parotids, submandibular glands, oral cavity and swallowing muscles (p < 0.05) for the same PTV coverage and without violating hard constraints. Impact of non-coplanar treatment and superiority of either VMACS60 and VMATCS90 was highly patient dependent.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to coplanar VMAT, dose to OARs was substantially reduced with a CS with one or two non-coplanar arcs. Preferences for coplanar or one or two additional arcs are highly patient-specific, balancing plan quality and treatment time.

Reflections on beam configuration optimization for intensity-modulated proton therapy

Presumably, intensity-modulated proton radiotherapy (IMPT) is the most powerful form of proton radiotherapy. In the current state of the art, IMPT beam configurations (i.e. the number of beams and their directions) are, in general, chosen subjectively based on prior experience and practicality. Beam configuration optimization (BCO) for IMPT could, in theory, significantly enhance IMPT’s therapeutic potential. However, BCO is complex and highly computer resource-intensive. Some algorithms for BCO have been developed for intensity-modulated photon therapy (IMRT). They are rarely used clinically mainly because the large number of beams typically employed in IMRT renders BCO essentially unnecessary. Moreover, in the newer form of IMRT, volumetric modulated arc therapy, there are no individual static beams. BCO is of greater importance for IMPT because it typically employs a very small number of beams (2-4) and, when the number of beams is small, BCO is critical for improving plan quality. However, the unique properties and requirements of protons, particularly in IMPT, make BCO challenging. Protons are more sensitive than photons to anatomic changes, exhibit variable relative biological effectiveness along their paths, and, as recently discovered, may spare the immune system. Such factors must be considered in IMPT BCO, though doing so would make BCO more resource intensive and make it more challenging to extend BCO algorithms developed for IMRT to IMPT. A limited amount of research in IMPT BCO has been conducted; however, considerable additional work is needed for its further development to make it truly effective and computationally practical. This article aims to provide a review of existing BCO algorithms, most of which were developed for IMRT, and addresses important requirements specific to BCO for IMPT optimization that necessitate the modification of existing approaches or the development of new effective and efficient ones.

Comparing Multi-Objective Local Search Algorithms for the Beam Angle Selection Problem

In intensity-modulated radiation therapy, treatment planners aim to irradiate the tumour according to a medical prescription while sparing surrounding organs at risk as much as possible. Although this problem is inherently a multi-objective optimisation (MO) problem, most of the models in the literature are single-objective ones. For this reason, a large number of single-objective algorithms have been proposed in the literature to solve such single-objective models rather than multi-objective ones. Further, a difficulty that one has to face when solving the MO version of the problem is that the algorithms take too long before converging to a set of (approximately) non-dominated points. In this paper, we propose and compare three different strategies, namely random PLS (rPLS), judgement-function-guided PLS (jPLS) and neighbour-first PLS (nPLS), to accelerate a previously proposed Pareto local search (PLS) algorithm to solve the beam angle selection problem in IMRT. A distinctive feature of these strategies when compared to the PLS algorithms in the literature is that they do not evaluate their entire neighbourhood before performing the dominance analysis. The rPLS algorithm randomly chooses the next non-dominated solution in the archive and it is used as a baseline for the other implemented algorithms. The jPLS algorithm first chooses the non-dominated solution in the archive that has the best objective function value. Finally, the nPLS algorithm first chooses the solutions that are within the neighbourhood of the current solution. All these strategies prevent us from evaluating a large set of BACs, without any major impairment in the obtained solutions’ quality. We apply our algorithms to a prostate case and compare the obtained results to those obtained by the PLS from the literature. The results show that algorithms proposed in this paper reach a similar performance than PLS and require fewer function evaluations.

A data-driven approach to optimal beam/arc angle selection for liver stereotactic body radiation therapy treatment planning

BACKGROUND

Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for liver cancer has shown promising therapeutic effects. Effective treatment relies not only on the precise delivery provided by image-guided radiation therapy (IGRT) but also high dose gradient formed around the treatment volume to spare functional liver tissue, which is highly dependent on the beam/arc angle selection. In this study, we aim to develop a decision support model to learn human planner's beam navigation approach for beam angle/arc angle selection for liver SBRT.

METHODS

A total of 27 liver SBRT/HIGRT patients (10 IMRT, 17 VMAT/DCA) were included in this study. A dosimetric budget index was defined for each beam angle/control point considering dose penetration through the patient body and liver tissue. Optimal beam angle setting (beam angles for IMRT and start/terminal angle for VMAT/DCA) was determined by minimizing the loss function defined as the sum of total dosimetric budget index and beam span penalty function. Leave-one-out validation was exercised on all 27 cases while weighting coefficients in the loss function was tuned in nested cross validation. To compare the efficacy of the model, a model plan was generated using automatically generated beam setting while retaining the original optimization constraints in the clinical plan. Model plan was normalized to the same planning target volume (PTV) V100% as the clinical plans. Dosimetric endpoints including PTV D98%, D2%, liver V20Gy and total MU were compared between two plan groups. Wilcoxon Signed-Rank test was performed with the null hypothesis being that no difference exists between two plan groups.

RESULTS

Beam setting prediction was instantaneous. Mean PTV D98% was 91.3% and 91.3% (P=0.566), while mean PTV D2% was 107.9% and 108.1% (P=0.164) for clinical plan and model plan respectively. Liver V20Gy showed no significant difference (P=0.590) with 23.3% for clinical plan and 23.4% for the model plan. Total MU is comparable (P=0.256) between the clinical plan (avg. 2,389.6) and model plan (avg. 2,319.6).

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence driven beam setting model yielded similar plan quality as hand-crafted clinical plan. It is capable of capturing human's knowledge in beam selection decision making. This model could facilitate decision making for beam angle selection while eliminating lengthy trial-and-error process of adjusting beam setting during liver SBRT treatment planning.

Comparison of non-coplanar optimization of static beams and arc trajectories for intensity-modulated treatments of meningioma cases

Two methods for non-coplanar beam direction optimization, one for static beams and another for arc trajectories, were proposed for intracranial tumours. The results of the beam angle optimizations were compared with the beam directions used in the clinical plans. Ten meningioma cases already treated were selected for this retrospective planning study. Algorithms for non-coplanar beam angle optimization (BAO) and arc trajectory optimization (ATO) were used to generate the corresponding plans. A plan quality score, calculated by a graphical method for plan assessment and comparison, was used to guide the beam angle optimization process. For each patient, the clinical plans (CLIN), created with the static beam orientations used for treatment, and coplanar VMAT approximated plans (VMAT) were also generated. To make fair plan comparisons, all plan optimizations were performed in an automated multicriteria calculation engine and the dosimetric plan quality was assessed. BAO and ATO plans presented, on average, moderate global plan score improvements over VMAT and CLIN plans. Nevertheless, while BAO and CLIN plans assured a more efficient OARs sparing, the ATO and VMAT plans presented a higher coverage and conformity of the PTV. Globally, all plans presented high-quality dose distributions. No statistically significant quality differences were found, on average, between BAO, ATO and CLIN plans. However, automated plan solution optimizations (BAO or ATO) may improve plan generation efficiency and standardization. In some individual patients, plan quality improvements were achieved with ATO plans, demonstrating the possible benefits of this automated optimized delivery technique.

A reinforcement learning application of a guided Monte Carlo Tree Search algorithm for beam orientation selection in radiation therapy

Current beam orientation optimization algorithms for radiotherapy, such as column generation (CG), are typically heuristic or greedy in nature because of the size of the combinatorial problem, which leads to suboptimal solutions. We propose a reinforcement learning strategy using a Monte Carlo Tree Search (MCTS) that can find a better beam orientation set in less time than CG. We utilize a reinforcement learning structure involving a supervised learning network to guide the MCTS and to explore the decision space of beam orientation selection problems. We previously trained a deep neural network (DNN) that takes in the patient anatomy, organ weights, and current beams, then approximates beam fitness values to indicate the next best beam to add. Here, we use this DNN to probabilistically guide the traversal of the branches of the Monte Carlo decision tree to add a new beam to the plan. To assess the feasibility of the algorithm, we used a test set of 13 prostate cancer patients, distinct from the 57 patients originally used to train and validate the DNN, to solve five-beam plans. To show the strength of the guided MCTS (GTS) compared to other search methods, we also provided the performances of Guided Search, Uniform Tree Search and Random Search algorithms. On average, GTS outperformed all the other methods. It found a better solution than CG in 237 s on average, compared to 360 s for CG, and outperformed all other methods in finding a solution with a lower objective function value in less than 1000 s. Using our GTS method, we could maintain planning target volume (PTV) coverage within 1% error similar to CG, while reducing the organ-at-risk mean dose for body, rectum, left and right femoral heads; the mean dose to bladder was 1% higher with GTS than with CG.

Dosimetric study on the use of Eclipse beam angle optimiser for conformal planning

Aim:

The aim of this study was to evaluate the use of Eclipse’s beam angle optimiser (BAO) for three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy planning.

Materials and methods:

Eleven 3D conformal lung plans, with varied tumour volumes, were retrospectively studied. For each clinical plan, a BAO plan was produced and then optimised by an experienced planner. Plan quality was assessed using International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements (ICRU)-83 and  Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) recommended dose reporting metrics for dose volume prescribing and reporting.

Results:

Differences in dose volume histograms for both methods showed no clinical significance. Planning target volume Dmax for both plans was comparable and within ICRU guidelines. Reported spinal cord Dmax and the doses to 33% and 67% volume of the heart were within the RTOG recommended limits. Mean lung V20 values for BAO and non-BAO plans were 20 and 16%, respectively. The average monitor units for the BAO plans were about 11% lower. The conformity and homogeneity indices were within the acceptable range for both cases. On average, it took 23 minutes to plan using the BAO compared to 68 minutes for the non-BAO plans.

Conclusion:

Eclipse BAO shows the potential to produce good quality conformal plans and reduce planning time. This process could be further refined with multi-leaf collimator and optimal collimator angle options.

Comparison of two beam angular optimization algorithms guided by automated multicriterial IMRT

PURPOSE

To compare two beam angle optimization (BAO) algorithms for coplanar and non-coplanar geometries in a multicriterial optimization framework.

METHODS

40 nasopharynx patients were selected for this retrospective planning study. IMRT optimized plans were produced by Erasmus-iCycle multicriterial optimization platform. Two different algorithms, based on a discrete and on a continuous exploration of the space search, algorithm i and B respectively, were used to address BAO. Plan quality evaluation and comparison were performed with SPIDERplan. Statistically significant differences between the plans were also assessed.

RESULTS

For plans using only coplanar incidences, the optimized beam distribution with algorithm i is more asymmetric than with algorithm B. For non-coplanar beam optimization, larger deviations from coplanarity were obtained with algorithm i than with algorithm B. Globally, both algorithms presented near equivalent plan quality scores, with algorithm B presenting a marginally better performance than algorithm i.

CONCLUSION

Almost all plans presented high quality, profiting from multicriterial and beam angular optimization. Although there were not significant differences when average results over the entire sample were considered, a case-by-case analysis revealed important differences for some patients.

The Scatter Search Based Algorithm for Beam Angle Optimization in Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy

This article introduces a new framework for beam angle optimization (BAO) in intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) using the Scatter Search Based Algorithm. The potential benefits of plans employing the coplanar optimized beam sets are also examined. In the proposed beam angle selection algorithm, the problem is solved in two steps. Initially, the gantry angles are selected using the Scatter Search Based Algorithm, which is a global optimization method. Then, for each beam configuration, the intensity profile is calculated by the conjugate gradient method to score each beam angle set chosen. A simulated phantom case with obvious optimal beam angles was used to benchmark the validity of the presented algorithm. Two clinical cases (TG-119 phantom and prostate cases) were examined to prepare a dose volume histogram (DVH) and determine the dose distribution to evaluate efficiency of the algorithm. A clinical plan with the optimized beam configuration was compared with an equiangular plan to determine the efficiency of the proposed algorithm. The BAO plans yielded significant improvements in the DVHs and dose distributions compared to the equispaced coplanar beams for each case. The proposed algorithm showed its potential to effectively select the beam direction for IMRT inverse planning at different tumor sites.

A new sparse optimization scheme for simultaneous beam angle and fluence map optimization in radiotherapy planning

[Formula: see text]-minimization-based sparse optimization was employed to solve the beam angle optimization (BAO) in intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) planning. The technique approximates the exact BAO formulation with efficiently computable convex surrogates, leading to plans that are inferior to those attainable with recently proposed gradient-based greedy schemes. In this paper, we alleviate/reduce the nontrivial inconsistencies between the [Formula: see text]-based formulations and the exact BAO model by proposing a new sparse optimization framework based on the most recent developments in group variable selection. We propose the incorporation of the group-folded concave penalty (gFCP) as a substitution to the [Formula: see text]-minimization framework. The new formulation is then solved by a variation of an existing gradient method. The performance of the proposed scheme is evaluated by both plan quality and the computational efficiency using three IMRT cases: a coplanar prostate case, a coplanar head-and-neck case, and a noncoplanar liver case. Involved in the evaluation are two alternative schemes: the [Formula: see text]-minimization approach and the gradient norm method (GNM). The gFCP-based scheme outperforms both counterpart approaches. In particular, gFCP generates better plans than those obtained using the [Formula: see text]-minimization for all three cases with a comparable computation time. As compared to the GNM, the gFCP improves both the plan quality and computational efficiency. The proposed gFCP-based scheme provides a promising framework for BAO and promises to improve both planning time and plan quality.

Intelligence-guided beam angle optimization in treatment planning of intensity-modulated radiation therapy

An intelligence guided approach based on fuzzy inference system (FIS) was proposed to automate beam angle optimization in treatment planning of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). The model of FIS is built on inference rules in describing the relationship between dose quality of IMRT plan and irradiated region of anatomical structure. Dose quality of IMRT plan is quantified by the difference between calculated and constraint doses of the anatomical structures in an IMRT plan. Irradiated region of anatomical structure is characterized by the metric, covered region of interest, which is the region of an anatomical structure under radiation field while beam's eye-view is conform to target volume. Initially, an IMRT plan is created with a single beam. The dose difference is calculated for the input of FIS and the output of FIS is obtained with processing of fuzzy inference. Later, a set of candidate beams is generated for replacing the current beam. This process continues until no candidate beams is found. Then the next beam is added to the IMRT plan and optimized in the same way as the previous beam. The new beam keeps adding to the IMRT plan until the allowed beam number is reached. Two spinal cases were investigated in this study. The preliminary results show that dose quality of IMRT plans achieved by this approach is better than those achieved by the default approach with equally spaced beam setting. It is effective to find the optimal beam combination of IMRT plan with the intelligence-guided approach.

Automatic learning-based beam angle selection for thoracic IMRT

PURPOSE

The treatment of thoracic cancer using external beam radiation requires an optimal selection of the radiation beam directions to ensure effective coverage of the target volume and to avoid unnecessary treatment of normal healthy tissues. Intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) planning is a lengthy process, which requires the planner to iterate between choosing beam angles, specifying dose-volume objectives and executing IMRT optimization. In thorax treatment planning, where there are no class solutions for beam placement, beam angle selection is performed manually, based on the planner's clinical experience. The purpose of this work is to propose and study a computationally efficient framework that utilizes machine learning to automatically select treatment beam angles. Such a framework may be helpful for reducing the overall planning workload.

METHODS

The authors introduce an automated beam selection method, based on learning the relationships between beam angles and anatomical features. Using a large set of clinically approved IMRT plans, a random forest regression algorithm is trained to map a multitude of anatomical features into an individual beam score. An optimization scheme is then built to select and adjust the beam angles, considering the learned interbeam dependencies. The validity and quality of the automatically selected beams evaluated using the manually selected beams from the corresponding clinical plans as the ground truth.

RESULTS

The analysis included 149 clinically approved thoracic IMRT plans. For a randomly selected test subset of 27 plans, IMRT plans were generated using automatically selected beams and compared to the clinical plans. The comparison of the predicted and the clinical beam angles demonstrated a good average correspondence between the two (angular distance 16.8° ± 10°, correlation 0.75 ± 0.2). The dose distributions of the semiautomatic and clinical plans were equivalent in terms of primary target volume coverage and organ at risk sparing and were superior over plans produced with fixed sets of common beam angles. The great majority of the automatic plans (93%) were approved as clinically acceptable by three radiation therapy specialists.

CONCLUSIONS

The results demonstrated the feasibility of utilizing a learning-based approach for automatic selection of beam angles in thoracic IMRT planning. The proposed method may assist in reducing the manual planning workload, while sustaining plan quality.

Simultaneous beam sampling and aperture shape optimization for SPORT

PURPOSE

Station parameter optimized radiation therapy (SPORT) was recently proposed to fully utilize the technical capability of emerging digital linear accelerators, in which the station parameters of a delivery system, such as aperture shape and weight, couch position/angle, gantry/collimator angle, can be optimized simultaneously. SPORT promises to deliver remarkable radiation dose distributions in an efficient manner, yet there exists no optimization algorithm for its implementation. The purpose of this work is to develop an algorithm to simultaneously optimize the beam sampling and aperture shapes.

METHODS

The authors build a mathematical model with the fundamental station point parameters as the decision variables. To solve the resulting large-scale optimization problem, the authors devise an effective algorithm by integrating three advanced optimization techniques: column generation, subgradient method, and pattern search. Column generation adds the most beneficial stations sequentially until the plan quality improvement saturates and provides a good starting point for the subsequent optimization. It also adds the new stations during the algorithm if beneficial. For each update resulted from column generation, the subgradient method improves the selected stations locally by reshaping the apertures and updating the beam angles toward a descent subgradient direction. The algorithm continues to improve the selected stations locally and globally by a pattern search algorithm to explore the part of search space not reachable by the subgradient method. By combining these three techniques together, all plausible combinations of station parameters are searched efficiently to yield the optimal solution.

RESULTS

A SPORT optimization framework with seamlessly integration of three complementary algorithms, column generation, subgradient method, and pattern search, was established. The proposed technique was applied to two previously treated clinical cases: a head and neck and a prostate case. It significantly improved the target conformality and at the same time critical structure sparing compared with conventional intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). In the head and neck case, for example, the average PTV coverage D99% for two PTVs, cord and brainstem max doses, and right parotid gland mean dose were improved, respectively, by about 7%, 37%, 12%, and 16%.

CONCLUSIONS

The proposed method automatically determines the number of the stations required to generate a satisfactory plan and optimizes simultaneously the involved station parameters, leading to improved quality of the resultant treatment plans as compared with the conventional IMRT plans.

Noncoplanar VMAT for nasopharyngeal tumors: Plan quality versus treatment time

PURPOSE

The authors investigated the potential of optimized noncoplanar irradiation trajectories for volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) treatments of nasopharyngeal patients and studied the trade-off between treatment plan quality and delivery time in radiation therapy.

METHODS

For three nasopharyngeal patients, the authors generated treatment plans for nine different delivery scenarios using dedicated optimization methods. They compared these scenarios according to dose characteristics, number of beam directions, and estimated delivery times. In particular, the authors generated the following treatment plans: (1) a 4π plan, which is a not sequenced, fluence optimized plan that uses beam directions from approximately 1400 noncoplanar directions and marks a theoretical upper limit of the treatment plan quality, (2) a coplanar 2π plan with 72 coplanar beam directions as pendant to the noncoplanar 4π plan, (3) a coplanar VMAT plan, (4) a coplanar step and shoot (SnS) plan, (5) a beam angle optimized (BAO) coplanar SnS IMRT plan, (6) a noncoplanar BAO SnS plan, (7) a VMAT plan with rotated treatment couch, (8) a noncoplanar VMAT plan with an optimized great circle around the patient, and (9) a noncoplanar BAO VMAT plan with an arbitrary trajectory around the patient.

RESULTS

VMAT using optimized noncoplanar irradiation trajectories reduced the mean and maximum doses in organs at risk compared to coplanar VMAT plans by 19% on average while the target coverage remains constant. A coplanar BAO SnS plan was superior to coplanar SnS or VMAT; however, noncoplanar plans like a noncoplanar BAO SnS plan or noncoplanar VMAT yielded a better plan quality than the best coplanar 2π plan. The treatment plan quality of VMAT plans depended on the length of the trajectory. The delivery times of noncoplanar VMAT plans were estimated to be 6.5 min in average; 1.6 min longer than a coplanar plan but on average 2.8 min faster than a noncoplanar SnS plan with comparable treatment plan quality.

CONCLUSIONS

The authors' study reconfirms the dosimetric benefits of noncoplanar irradiation of nasopharyngeal tumors. Both SnS using optimized noncoplanar beam ensembles and VMAT using an optimized, arbitrary, noncoplanar trajectory enabled dose reductions in organs at risk compared to coplanar SnS and VMAT. Using great circles or simple couch rotations to implement noncoplanar VMAT, however, was not sufficient to yield meaningful improvements in treatment plan quality. The authors estimate that noncoplanar VMAT using arbitrary optimized irradiation trajectories comes at an increased delivery time compared to coplanar VMAT yet at a decreased delivery time compared to noncoplanar SnS IMRT.

Use dose bricks concept to implement nasopharyngeal carcinoma treatment planning

Purpose. A “dose bricks” concept has been used to implement nasopharyngeal carcinoma treatment plan; this method specializes particularly in the case with bell shape nasopharyngeal carcinoma case. Materials and Methods. Five noncoplanar fields were used to accomplish the dose bricks technique treatment plan. These five fields include (a) right superior anterior oblique (RSAO), (b) left superior anterior oblique (LSAO), (c) right anterior oblique (RAO), (d) left anterior oblique (LAO), and (e) superior inferior vertex (SIV). Nondivergence collimator central axis planes were used to create different abutting field edge while normal organs were blocked by multileaf collimators in this technique. Results. The resulting 92% isodose curves encompassed the CTV, while maximum dose was about 115%. Approximately 50% volume of parotid glands obtained 10–15% of total dose and 50% volume of brain obtained less than 20% of total dose. Spinal cord receives only 5% from the scatter dose. Conclusions. Compared with IMRT, the expenditure of planning time and costing, “dose bricks” may after all be accepted as an optional implementation in nasopharyngeal carcinoma conformal treatment plan; furthermore, this method also fits the need of other nonhead and neck lesions if organ sparing and noncoplanar technique can be executed.

Nonisocentric treatment strategy for breast radiation therapy: a proof of concept study

PURPOSE

To propose a nonisocentric treatment strategy as a special form of station parameter optimized radiation therapy, to improve sparing of critical structures while preserving target coverage in breast radiation therapy.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

To minimize the volume of exposed lung and heart in breast irradiation, we propose a novel nonisocentric treatment scheme by strategically placing nonconverging beams with multiple isocenters. As its name suggests, the central axes of these beams do not intersect at a single isocenter as in conventional breast treatment planning. Rather, the isocenter locations and beam directions are carefully selected, in that each beam is only responsible for a certain subvolume of the target, so as to minimize the volume of irradiated normal tissue. When put together, the beams will provide an adequate coverage of the target and expose only a minimal amount of normal tissue to radiation. We apply the nonisocentric planning technique to 2 previously treated clinical cases (breast and chest wall).

RESULTS

The proposed nonisocentric technique substantially improved sparing of the ipsilateral lung. Compared with conventional isocentric plans using 2 tangential beams, the mean lung dose was reduced by 38% and 50% using the proposed technique, and the volume of the ipsilateral lung receiving ≥ 20 Gy was reduced by a factor of approximately 2 and 3 for the breast and chest wall cases, respectively. The improvement in lung sparing is even greater compared with volumetric modulated arc therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

A nonisocentric implementation of station parameter optimized radiation therapy has been proposed for breast radiation therapy. The new treatment scheme overcomes the limitations of existing approaches and affords a useful tool for conformal breast radiation therapy, especially in cases with extreme chest wall curvature.